//
you're reading...
Uncategorized

Analysis of Events in the World or How to Treat a Modern EU?

Alexander Irkhin

Modern West is not indivisible. Its division is manifested by at least two geopolitical cores — the EU and the USA. Including the policy on the post-Soviet space — in Ukraine.

In light of the separateness of the Western civilization a fair question arises: how to treat the modern EU?

As an independent player or as an element of geopolitical technologies of the policy of the USA — when the European Union becomes and is used by Washington used as a geopolitical bridgehead for expansion into Eurasia.

In this context, the Dnepropetrovsk researcher M. Shepelev more than ten years ago noted that modern support of the EU expansion to the East, but not to the South, pursues the same objectives, as were formulated in the early twentieth century, implemented with the use of modernized methods.

Therefore, there is a danger that the format of the European Union in the era of the «clash of civilizations» expects approximately the same fate as that of the sanitary zone states in the 30s of XX century. In any case, Ukraine in this game becomes a «front-line» state.

According to the methodology of geopolitical approach, the EU can be divided into three centers of power, which have their own approaches to Ukraine and all post-Soviet space: the Franco-German core, the countries of Eastern Europe and the UK.

The Franco-German core is not indivisible. Germany’s interests include the entire territory of Ukraine and the western part of the Russian Federation. The line of the interests of France lies further South, in the colonies of the Mediterranean, and occupies only the line of the Western Ukraine.

The Eastern Europe is a conductor of interests of Uncontinental Europe and the USA, due to the rapid accessibility to them through the marine communication: through the Baltic Sea, Mediterranean and Black Sea.

Britain has a certain autonomy and strategic experience of the management of Eurasian concert of great powers. Even if English hand if not visible in any of the world’s crises, it can be traced, that quite often the main beneficiary of its results, in a strange way, becomes London.

In this context, the British imperial elite transferred its experience in the United States after 1945. But teachers teach their students not always and not everything, due to the natural desire of the weakening Empires to be in demand and to survive in this cruel and rapidly changing world.

These mentioned centers the EU andthe USA are united by one thing — the border of the East and the West in Eurasia, which passes in the Baltic-Black Sea arc. It is mobile, it displaces sometimes to the East, sometimes to the West, and this is a reflection of the struggle for space and resources between the two civilizations.

Indubitable dominant economic European force is Germany. Berlin is interested in maintaining stability in the Eastern outskirts of the EU for the following reasons:

Firstly, the global economic crisis significantly undermines the process of Germanization of Europe.

Secondly, Berlin is not a military center, but the Ukrainian crisis will force us to revise the defense approaches of Germany to the formation of its budget towards militarization, that will slow down the economic development of the center of European integration.

Thirdly, any response to the Ukrainian crisis will force Berlin to spend more on Kiev, and in the presence of problematic economic zones in the European zone (Greece, Spain, in perspective — Portugal and Italy), Germany will face then not the structural, but systemic economic problems.

Even without perceiving the interests of developmentof German and Russian business, the above factors work on a compromise between Berlin and Moscow.

Eastern European countries are facing a double motivation.

The first – is nationalistic, connected with the fact that Europe — this space of national states. National interests of the Eastern outskirts of the EU lie in the plane of the annexation of the national enclaves on the territory of Ukraine.

The second – is in promoting of the interests of the U.S. and the UK, who are critically interested in maintaining control over the Baltic-Black Sea arc, which divides Germany and Russia and at the same time prevents the formation of the Russian-German Union.

111The first motivation in general does not contradict the second, but it is provided, that

Russia and Germany do not come to a compromise at the expense of the small countries of Eastern Europe (the Molotov — Ribbentrop Pact).

Great Britain in the European concert has a certain freedom of military-political maneuver, which had been provided by the remoteness from the European continent and geographical isolation. This position allowed the state for several centuries to be a conductor of European and world politics. Operating exclusively with the maritime strategy, London has constraints in the implementation of its interests, which consist of the possibility to penetrate inland from the coastline.

The logic of London consists in creating a system of balances in its own interests and take advantage of the game on these unions, that will lead to pulling hot chestnuts out of the fire for England with someone else’s hands (Russia, Germany, France, Poland, Japan, China). Britain, according to geopolitical technologies, is interested in a more powerful and forceful scenario of development of the Ukrainian crisis, which will spoil relations between Russians and Ukrainians, Germans and Poles, Hungarians and Romanians in different combinations of the mentioned pairs.

Thus, at least three or four basic approaches within Europe reveal the dilemmas of the EU with respect to the Ukrainian crisis.

After the disintegration of the USSR, we live in the period of the formation of the system of international relations. Bipolar system is gone, unipolar failed to resist, the world of new Empires is waiting for us, where the USA, Russia, China, Germany, India, Brazil and maybe a few other centers (Turkey, Iran) will compete with each other in the struggle for survival in the new military-political conditions and the new technological structure of the world economy.

The historical experience of the last centuries shows that a stable international system is always preceded by a great war. By the same analogy the modern world is in the pre-war period (1938-39), and the Ukrainian crisis accelerates the formation of military-political and economic blocks (Russian-Chinese rapprochement).

Crimean News

Advertisements

Discussion

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: